INTERVIEW WITH SENATOR HENRY JACKSON

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP88-01070R000100150015-3
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 8
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 17, 2007
• Sequence Number: 15
• Publication Date: April 25, 1982
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100150015-3
RADIO TV REPORTS, INC.
4701 WILLARD AVENUE, CHEVY CHASE, MARYLAND 20015 656-4068
PROGRAM Face the Nation
April 25, 1982 11:30 A.M.
WDVM-TV
CBS Network
Washington, D.C.
SUBJECT Interview with Senator Henry Jackson
ANNOUNCER: From CBS News Washington, a spontaneous
and unrehearsed news interview on Face the Nation with Senator
Henry Jackson, Democrat of Washington and a member of the Armed
Services and Intelligence Committees.
Senator Jackson will be questioned by CBS News diplo-
matic correspondent Robert Pierpoint, by Lars Eric Nelson, Wash-
ington Bureau Chief for the New York Daily News, and by the
moderator, CBS News correspondent George Herman.
[Reports on Falkland Islands Developments]
GEORGE HERMAN: Well, Senator Jackson, that is what
we know as of this moment. So I guess my first question has
to be this: Would you think, at this point, a major armed
military clash is inevitable? Or is there still time for the
diplomats to turn this thing around towards peace?
SENATOR HENRY JACKSON: I think we're virtually at
the end of the road, Mr. Herman, It's clear that we have tried
to play the role of honest broker. We will now have to decide
whether we'll make this last-ditch effort today to go to London.
And if that fails, then the next decision will be, which direc-
tion does the United States go in this conflict? Not military
intervention, but I think there'll be a clear tilt to Britain.
HERMAN: Senator Jackson, in the last few moments in
this fast-moving story there's been still another development,
and that is this: that the juntain Argentina has made an an-
nouncement to its people, has put this story officially on the
OFFICES IN: WASHINGTON D.C. ? NEW YORK ? LOS ANGELES ? CHICAGO ? DETROIT ? AND OTHER PRINCIPAL CITIES
Material supplied by Radio 1V Reports. Inc. may be used for file and reference purposes only. It may not be reproduced, sold or publicly demonstrated or exhibited.
Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100150015-3
 Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100150015-3
record. The junta announces -- this is the broadcast -- to the
people of the Argentine nation that early today two British heli-
copters strafed the port in South Georgia Island, were repelled,
so forth and so on. And then it says, "It is stressed that the
attitude of British naval units is a flagrant violation of U.N.
Security Council's Resolution 502 and places the United Kingdom
in the situation of an aggressor country."
Is that your interpretation of the United Nation's
rulings on the Argentine situation in the Falkland Islands?
SENATOR JACKSON: Certainly not. The Argentine gov-
ernment is in violation of the United Nations Charter, in using
force to settle a dispute. That is at the heart of the whole
U.N. process. And I don't buy that at all. That is simply,
I think, an effort on the part of the military dictatorship to
justify and to pave the way for further trouble for their people.
They've got real trouble at home.
LARS NELSON: Senator Jackson, you suggested in your
opening answer that this government now has to decide whether
to tilt toward Britain or not. What do you mean by that? How
far should we go in helping them?
SENATOR JACKSON: Well, I think it's clear that when
the chips are down, our interests and the interests of Great
Britain are obviously, by tradition and otherwise, much closer
We have to face the fact that the NATO countries are solidly
behind Britain. Clearly, there's no obligation on our part,
having gone that last mile to try to bring peace, to side with
Argentina.
I do not mean intervention militarily. But I do sus-
pect that we will have to join very well in the boycott of the
movement of goods to Argentina.
After all, let's remember that Argentina was with the
Nazis right up till 1943.
ROBERT PIERPOINT: But Senator, Argentina now seems to
be more with the Soviet Union. They've switched sides. They've
been selling wheat to the Soviet Union, against most of the
world's boycott.
Do you think that this dispute over the Falklands has
the possibility of escalating into a superpower confrontation?
SENATOR JACKSON: I don't think so. I don't think
the Soviets -- while they love to fish in troubled waters, I
don't see the Soviets reaching way down into the South Atlantic
as the area of intervention on their part.
Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-01070ROODa_OQ15 D- 5 3
 I think it does point up something that I feel very
strongly about, and that is the need for a joint American-Soviet
communications center. I mean manned around the clock. Not just
a hot line, but a center. I'm working on this concept and it's
in a conceptual stage right now. But it points up the need to
avoid war by accident or miscalculation. That can always be a
real danger. World War I was not premediated and designed; it
was by accident and miscalculation.
HERMAN: Let me narrow the focus a little bit back
down to simply Argentina versus Britain. You've already said
that you don't think there should be any American manpower in-
volved in it. But how about such things as American tankers,
oil tankers at sea, perhaps, to refuel the British fleet, assis-
tance of that kind?
SENATOR JACKSON: No, I think that we should, at this
point in time, stay clear of any direct or indirect military
support in that operation in the South Atlantic.
HERMAN: Do you support Senator Moynihan's Senate reso-
lution that the United States should join the European Common
Market's sanctions against Argentina?
Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100150015-3
SENATOR JACKSON: The sanctions, yes, I support.
HERMAN: Will it pass?
SENATOR JACKSON: Yes. I don't think there's any --
look, in this country the support for Britain runs all the way
from the Wall Street Journal to the Village Voice.
spectrum.
HERMAN: Well, accepting that, let me ask you...
SENATOR JACKSON: And I think that's a pretty broad
HERMAN: Accepting that as face value, as your state-
SENATOR JACKSON: Yes, sir.
HERMAN: ...and there's a lot of agreement with that,
how do you rate the Reagan Administration's performance in the
balancing act, and have they balanced properly?
SENATOR JACKSON: Yes, I -- you know, we're always
suspect. That is inevitable?
SENATOR JACKSON: We, the United States is suspect of
Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-010708000100150015-3
 . Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100150015-3
tilting or supporting the British side. But clearly, I think
Secretary Haig has done a good job in being the honest broker.
But here you have a regime in Argentina, a military dictatorship
that's determined to get away from their troubles at home by
going into the Falkland Islands. And this is at the heart of
the problem.
PIERPOINT: But Senator, if the United States does tilt
toward Argentina...
PIERPOINT: I'm sorry, toward Britain. What happens to
our policy vis-a-vis the rest of Latin America? And I'm thinking
particularly of Argentina's help in our problems with the guer-
rillas in Central America. That's been one of the reasons we did
not want to tilt toward Britain.
SENATOR JACKSON: I'm fully aware of those problems.
I would also point out that it does not help us in South America
and Central America to be aligned with a dictatorship run by the
military. This is the third one in Argentina. And clearly, that
does not help American foreign policy when the choice is between
a country that is committed to freedom, who's been responsible
around the world for giving up their colonies and leaving demo-
cratic institutions around the world. And I think the British
clearly are in the right on this matter.
PIERPOINT: But you still have the problem...
SENATOR JACKSON: Oh, you have the problem.
PIERPOINT: ...of American policy in Latin America.
SENATOR JACKSON: Some would say it might be a Hobson's
choice. We have NATO. I mean NATO is at the heart of this mat-
ter, and the NATO countries are 100 percent behind Great Britain.
So we're going to have to make some difficult decisions.
But I think it's clear we must avoid direct military intervention.
NELSON: Senator, I'd like to return to the subject of
the Soviet Union. As you know, May Ist is the target date within
the Administration to have its new proposals on nuclear disarma-
ment for the START talks. Have you been told how this government
is going to proceed on START? And how do you think it should
proceed? What should it measure? What should it restrict?
SENATOR JACKSON: It seems to me that the main thrust
of START must be reductions. This has been the great trouble,
starting with SALT I right down to the present. The Administra-
tion should give overriding priority to reductions that will lead
Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100150015-3
 Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100150015-3
to equal aggregates and will pave the road for the eventual elim-
ination of all nuclear weapons. That has been my position ever
since I came to the Senate, and it's my position today.
I would think that that will be the direction that the
Administration will go. To my knowledge, they have not come down
on a final formula in that regard.
NELSON: Do you have any sense of the timing, when the
talks with the Russians might begin?
SENATOR JACKSON: I would -- I do not. But I strongly
have urged the Administration to move without delay, to begin talks
immediately. So that the position of the Administration, which I
say will -- I hope will be for reductions, must be the number one
priority.
HERMAN: Do you agree with the President, who says that
the Soviet Union has a definite margin of superiority; or with
Secretary Weinberger, who says that the Soviets have begun to
build an edge of superiority; or with neither?
SENATOR JACKSON: We have a deterrent capability. The
Soviets are ahead of us in land-based missiles, with throw weight
and so on. We are ahead qualitatively in submarine missile-firing
forces and bombers. It is adequate at this point in time to deter
the Soviets. Everyone worries what it will be down the road un-
less steps are taken to bring about a reduction. This is the
critical thing.
Our target and our goal -- and we must challenge the
Soviets: Join with us in elimination of all nuclear weapons.
That's why I think the real issue is the need for a communica-
tions center, a device by which we can avoid the possibility of
war by accident.
I think that's what's really worrying people. Because
it doesn't do any good to freeze the balance of terror. You want
to eliminate it. And you want to be sure that you have the in-
stitutions in place that can avoid war by accident and miscalcu-
lation. I think that's what's really worrying the American peo-
ple, that some trigger-happy episode will lead into a nuclear
showdown and a nuclear conflict.
PIERPOINT: But Senator, one thing that's worrying a
lot of American people and a lot of people elsewhere in the world
is that the fact of the matter is we each, the two superpowers,
the Soviet Union and the United States, have enough to obliterate
each other many times over. And a great many people now favor a
freeze at the current level. You do not. Is that correct? Why?
SENATOR JACKSON: I want reductions. A mere freeze
Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100150015-3
 doesn't solve the problem. If they're worried now about the
nuclear situation, what good does it do to freeze it unless you
have a plan underway to reduce. And I want talks now.
Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100150015-3
SENATOR JACKSON: I'm not advocating a buildup. I'm
saying to the Soviets, for instance, we would defer going ahead
with the MX if you will pull back on those huge SS-18s and 19s.
I would say to the Soviets clearly, and which we are saying in
Geneva, that we will not deploy the cruise missiles in Europe
or the Pershing II if you will withdraw your SS-20s.
PIERPOINT: But Senator, you've got to start someplace,
and a freeze is a start. And what you're talking about is nego-
tiations which can go on forever, as we've seen.
SENATOR JACKSON: Well, I'm for -- my resolution pro-
vides for a freeze at reduced levels.
HERMAN: But your -- one of the key words in your reso-
lution and in a great many others is that old word "verifiable."
to verify?
SENATOR JACKSON: Oh, I agree.
HERMAN: Are the Russians ready to agree to allow us
SENATOR JACKSON: Well, Mr. Herman, we face the most --
the severest challenge once you get into an arms elimination
process. That, as distinguished from arms control, will require,
in my judgment on-site inspection. How else are you going to
determine whether they have actually destroyed their missiles
and we have destroyed ours? That, I think, will be one of the
biggest problems facing the negotiators, how to handle the on-
site issue.
HERMAN: Well, as sort of a side issue leading up to
that, what is the state of the American intelligence community,
especially with Admiral Inman leaving?
SENATOR JACKSON: Well, I must say that Admiral Inman,
I've known for many years, was a professional's professional, a
man of great integrity, enormous respect, who had the total con-
fidence of members on the HiII. I believe that the intelligence
community is making good progress towards revitalization. I
understand the replacement has been agreed upon. The name will
be formally announced tomorrow. It will be a man that all of
us respect in the Intelligence Committee. He is an individual
who is a career man, who has been in the service some 31 years.
And I believe that the current unfortunate hassle in public re-
garding Admiral Inman will be rectified, at least to a substantial
Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100150015-3
 Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100150015-3
HERMAN: From what you say, I gather that you know who
it is. Let me ask you whether you think this person will be able
to rebuild the total confidence needed?
SENATOR JACKSON: I do. I think he is a first-rate
professional, and it will help the morale within the professional
service of the CIA because the man has been selected out of that
service, as Admiral Inman was, for all practical purposes...
PIERPOINT: Why don't you go ahead and formally announce
it here? We're perfectly willing...
SENATOR JACKSON: Well, I thought, you know, with the
Falkland Islands and everything else, that the press corps could
be busy scurrying around.
Well, it's just a matter of principle. I've agreed not
to give out his name. I've given you a job description and a body
description, that I'll be surprised if you can't figure it out
before the day's over. And I'm sure it'll be on the CBS Evening
News this evening at 6 or 6:30.
NELSON: It's been a tradition, you know, that the top
two jobs, at least one of them be held by a military man. From
what you're saying, now we're going to have civilian control at
the top for the first time. Is that wise?
SENATOR JACKSON: Yes. I don't think -- I don't get
excited about whether they're military or not. I want to know
what they know. One of our grestest Secretaries of State was
a fellow named George Marshall.
PIERPOINT: Senator, one of the reasons that Admiral
Inman resigned, we understand, was that he was opposed to the CIA
going into domestic spying. We've had some of that in Watergate.
Do you think that's a problem now?
SENATOR JACKSON: I would hope not. I think that we've
made our position clear in the Intelligence Committee that there
has to be an absolute cutoff at water's edge. It's stupid for the
CIA to be involved, in any manner, shape or form, with activities
in the United States. There's a need of close liaison between the
FBI, in counterintelligence especially, and the CIA. I believe
that is emerging.
HERMAN: Let me ask you to do a quick change of hats
from Jackson of Intelligence to Jackson of Energy.
The oil-producing nations have managed to reduce their
production a great deal more than a lot of people thought they
Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-01070R000100150015-3
 Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100150015-3
would be able to. Are we about to see the end of the oil glut
and rising oil prices which may bring back some inflation to our
country?
SENATOR JACKSON: Yes, I think it could happen. And my
greatest fear is the possibility of Iran moving into the Gulf
militarily to destroy the oil fields in Kuwait, Abu Dhabi, the
United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia because those countries
sided with Iraq in the war against Iran. We could wake up one
morning and find that those critical facilities have been des-
troyed. I think that is the greatest immediate threat. We need
to build our strategic petroleum reserve.
NELSON: Should we build up our military forces in that
region to defend countries like Kuwait, Bahrain, Abu Dhabi, and
so on against this possible attack?
SENATOR JACKSON: I think, clearly, we need to have
sufficient forces that can deter such a move. And it ought to
be made clear to Iran that we will respond to any attempt to cut
off the oil supply to the United States or our Western allies.
HERMAN: Thank you very much, Senator Jackson, for being
on this rather abbreviated version of Face the Nation.
Approved For Release 2007/05/18: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000100150015-3